Oscar Pistorius Trial

The Biggest Story Of The London Olympics Is Now On Trial For Murder

The Pistorius case has become a reality series that is fast snowballing out of control.

In what’s being billed as South Africa’s version of the O.J. Simpson trial, double-amputee Paralympian and Olympian Oscar Pistorius begins his trial for murder this week. How is it possible that a world champion and Paralympic medalist has ended up here?

Pistorius was charged after the shooting death of his girlfriend, model Reeva Steenkamp, on February 14, 2013. He fired several rounds through a closed bathroom door, hitting Steenkamp, who he claims to have thought was an intruder. While Pistorius admits to discharging his weapon, he has denied that the resulting death was premeditated.

Before the tragic events of last year, Pistorius wasn’t in the South African news nearly as often as the international media would think. I’m a sports fan, but I certainly didn’t stay up late to watch him win gold at the IPC World Championships in New Zealand in 2011, nor did I cheer as he crossed the finish line in Durban with a time of 46.56 seconds against able-bodied athletes.

Pistorius was famous in South Africa when he competed. Off the track and out of season, nobody really paid any attention to him.

So why is there such an incredibly media frenzy around Pistorius’ trial? Even Steenkamp was relatively unknown before this. While every murder is tragic, in this case, there is a simple reason: scandal.

The media loves a juicy story, and as the details of previous domestic disturbances, a discharged weapon at a gathering a number of years ago and allegations about Pistorius’ aggressive nature have emerged, the case has received more and more coverage. The media couldn’t wish for a more salacious scenario: An Olympic runner kills his FHM model girlfriend under dubious circumstances.

In truth, looking up Pistorius on Twitter reveals many users who won’t be following the trial at all — myself included. Yes, I’m interested in the outcome, but I certainly won’t be buying a subscription to South African satellite pay-channel DStv, which has created a special 24-hour Pistorius channel dedicated to trial coverage, nor will I listen to the live audio broadcast, the opening and closing arguments or the testimony of state witnesses. I will, however, perhaps tune into the judgment and the sentencing.

Only once the details of what exactly happened on that fateful night start to emerge will the public be able to formulate opinions about the events. From where I’m sitting, he seems pretty guilty — although guilty of what, I’m not completely sure. Whether it was homicide or criminally negligent manslaughter has yet to be determined.

But the fact remains that Pistorius did indeed fire his weapon, by his own admission, and rounds from that weapon fatally wounded Steenkamp. For most South Africans, whether he is guilty or not seems to be irrelevant — they’re more interested in the sentence that he will receive at the end of it all. According to South African law, the minimum sentence for murder is 25 years.

CNN has labeled it the “trial of the century,” but to me, that’s a bit far-fetched. I think he is an ordinary man who made a mistake. South Africa has never had a trial of this magnitude, which helps to fan the flames of curiosity and morbid fascination. The Pistorius case has become a reality series that is fast snowballing out of control.